The call-in assignment...

Jean-Luc Cornec's sheep phones courtesy of temp13rec via Flickr and Creative Commons

Okay. The radio assignment.

I tried. I did try. I spent a good 45 minutes listening to the Thom Hartmann show on WHMP. I caught him with a guest who was talking about global economics and as interesting as the topic was I didn't really have anything to contribute. So I waited for a new guest. And on came some woman who had written a book about whiteness and race and I thought to myself, "okay, this I can handle. I will call and ask a question about those people who believe that racism is now over in America because we elected Obama over McCain." (In case you are wondering, I think that people who believe that are incredibly unaware of racial issues in America and the reductive ignorance of a statement like that pretty much terrifies me).

So I dialed. And I was expecting to be put on hold or to reach an automated "press one for live questions" menu. Instead, a woman answered the phone directly. And then my brain and mouth launched into a debate with each other. Uh, why am I doing this? What is the point of my call? Do I care more about getting a good grade on this assignment or about making a valuable contribution to this conversation?

Instead of asking her if I could go on the air, I asked her if the show was pre-recorded or live. (Honestly, I was curious). She said it was always live. I paused for a moment and considered my options. And then I thanked her and hung up the phone.

I will be the first to admit that there's a lot of irony to my reaction. I can elaborate on this more in class, but suffice it to say that I've got a long history with radio and spend a lot of my time preaching the greatness of it as a medium. And don't get me wrong, I still think radio is amazing. Radio is one of the best communication tools we have -- it is a one-time investment that can keep us connected to news and culture with no additional cost. But as I sat on the phone with the woman who answered my call I realized that the entire root of my motivation was this assignment. I didn't want to ask a question just for the sake of doing it. I was just going through the motions. And that sort of empty interaction is not going to elevate the discourse on anything. So I hung up.

I've decided to take this assignment in stride as a sort of conscientious objector. Now don't get me wrong, had I taken the time to consume talk radio non-stop for the past few weeks I am absolutely positive I could have found a discussion going on that I actually wanted to participate in. And for that, I recognize that the reason I was unable to really complete the assignment is partially based on poor time management. (In all honesty, my thesis is due in ten days and I work about 50 hours a week on top of taking this class…excuses, excuses, I know). But after going through the forced motions of the LTE assignment, I just couldn't bring myself to do it again.

So let me instead close by going into some detail about why I think elevating the discourse is important enough for me to refuse to complete the assignment. I considered calling in to a program that played music to sound off about the host’s choices. But as I pointed out in my last post, that is not journalism. That’s cultural critique, it’s opinion, but it’s not reporting. My opinion on whether the music is any good, or on the things one should consider before adopting a pet from the pound (another fabulous program running on AM talk radio this morning), or even me calling in to Rush’s show to tell him that I can’t stand him and feel he is a symbol for everything that is wrong with America today – none of it is journalism.

If we re-frame this class as one on the role of interactivity in an emerging digital media space and its impact on culture, politics, and democracy then I would have a completely different take on this entire thing. Because all of these elements, from LTEs to talk radio to restaurant reviews to Twitter are all impacting culture, politics, and democracy. But that doesn’t mean they are journalism. And framing it that way has me asking the following: at what point did the lines completely blur between reporting and commentary?

I’m the first to say that when dealing in definitions about journalists and journalism we are confronting an important issue that is both nuanced and complex. This whole landscape of “citizen journalism” (a term that is immensely problematic) directly challenges a lot of the established and accepted definitions of what defines a journalist.

But that’s exactly it. I don’t know if the definition of a journalist is necessarily as important as the definition of journalism.